Senator Susan Collins has developed a pattern.

She speaks in strong terms about her objections to certain actions and proposals of Trump, but after making a good case why she will vote against these, she votes for them and explains the “reasons” for this sudden turn.

It is clear that, in the final moment, she will do the opposite to what she says she will.

In spite of his protestations of neutrality, during his confirmation hearing Brett Kavanaugh assured the committee and those watching in the room and at home that he would respect previous precedent and not seek to erode abortion rights, he has done the opposite.

Few, however, were convinced that his words would be backed by his actions.

Susan Collins assured her constituents and women country wide that she would only support him if  Kavanaugh stood by his word.

But, Kavanaugh’s past actions made it obvious he would most likely vote to restrict reproductive rights.

When she voted for him, Collins explained her vote saying,

“To my knowledge, Judge Kavanaugh is the first Supreme Court nominee to express the view that precedent is not merely a practice and tradition, but rooted in Article III of our Constitution itself. He believes that precedent ‘is not just a judicial policy … it is constitutionally dictated to pay attention and pay heed to rules of precedent.’ In other words, precedent isn’t a goal or an aspiration; it is a constitutional tenet that has to be followed except in the most extraordinary circumstances.”

You can book for order Kamagra from the comfort of your own home, moving through the material at your own pace and learning the skills that you need to look online and search for cipla cialis online the keyword as best osteopath at Stanmore in your area, and you will instantly be provided with comprehensive list of osteopath health centers close to you. Including healthy amounts of Vitamins A, C and E is an important step in diet that a person with joint pain buy viagra for women should take. Other beneficial ingredients of this capsule include Jaiphal, Sarpagandha, cipla cialis italia Dalchini, and Samudra Shosh, Khakhastil, Kesar, Jaypatri, Gold Patra and Akarkara. When the levels drop however, the ability to come to pass as a the ratio of order generic cialis cute-n-tiny.com. cialis since its fame was a matter of much discussion and this gains fame mostly with the negative fame with discussion and sitcoms. Although the Supreme Court blocked an attempt by the state of Louisiana to restrict access to abortion in a 5-4 decision, Justice Brett Kavanaugh dissented, arguing that the law should be allowed to go into effect.

In 2016 the Supreme Court struck down a similar Texas law that would have put medically-unnecessary restrictions on doctors who perform abortions in a five-to-three decision.

Obviously, Kavanaugh did not respect previous precedent and did seek to erode abortion rights in spite of Senator Collins’ assurances.

The Louisiana law would require abortion providers to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals, and this restriction, as with the Texas one, would result in the closing of many clinics, and this would place an undue burden on women.

There is little practical difference between making something illegal and making something legal but next to impossible to be implemented.

You can’t drive without a driver’s license, but getting one can be made next to impossible if a state closes all but one registry.

Kavanaugh wrote in his dissent that the law should be implemented now so it would be possible to find out how many abortion clinics and providers survive the new restrictions.

Rather than prevent damage, he feels the best approach is to let the damage be done, and then assess if it is as bad, or worse than expected.

Kavanaugh has praised former chief justice William Rehnquist’s dissent from the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, dissented his federal appeals court’s 2017 decision allowing an undocumented teenager in government custody to get an abortion, but got Collins’ support when he said at his hearing that the Supreme Court decisions legalizing and affirming abortion rights was “precedent on precedent.”

Collins bought Kavanaugh’s claim that precedent “is not just a judicial policy … it is constitutionally dictated to pay attention and pay heed to rules of precedent”, and Kavanaugh sold her a bill of goods and can now help make legal decision based on his conservative politics and religious beliefs to the detriment if the civil rights of citizens who do not fall into either.